What is the proper punishment for Gershon Baskin?

[Yochai]

Sanhedrin tractate of Talmud describes how the capital punishments are performed in chapters 6 and 7. Stoning to death is not about throwing stones at person until he/she slowly dies from pain or loss of blood. First of all the criminal is pushed from high building to hard rock ground and the most of chances that it will result in immediate death. And then heavy big stone is laid upon him, so if he's still alive he'll die immediately.

The same way burning to death is not to set fire on the person so he/she will die gradually in pain. The criminal's mouth is opened and cast burning lead is spilled into it, so it immediately burns out the heart and other crucial organs, which results in immediate death.

Thanks Spectator, this was very interesting. I did not know that. Can you please provide a source for this knowledge?

This is discussed in Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, chapters 6 and 7. Unfortunately, I don't have a direct link to these chapters translated to English, but you can try to search them on Internet. Better still, you can go to an Orthodox synagogue and ask a rabbi to confirm it and to show you the exact source in Talmud.

Here is an English translation of Chapter VI. Chapter VII is also translated on the same site. - 
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_42.html#chapter_vi

Original Mishna and Gemara- http://www.mechon-mamre.org/b/l/l4406.htm

Thank you for your insight, Spectator. Your analysis on Shirat Hayam is absolutely true.  As the Sages tell us, the song was not rejoicing in the fall of our enemies, but celebrating Hashem's justice.

I have heard many Kahanists criticize the Sanhedrin for their enforcement of capital punishment, which I think is absurd.  To pass judgement like that, I believe someone has to be a Gadol bTorah.

[Manch]

Sanhedrin tractate of Talmud describes how the capital punishments are performed in chapters 6 and 7. Stoning to death is not about throwing stones at person until he/she slowly dies from pain or loss of blood. First of all the criminal is pushed from high building to hard rock ground and the most of chances that it will result in immediate death. And then heavy big stone is laid upon him, so if he's still alive he'll die immediately.

The same way burning to death is not to set fire on the person so he/she will die gradually in pain. The criminal's mouth is opened and cast burning lead is spilled into it, so it immediately burns out the heart and other crucial organs, which results in immediate death.

Thanks Spectator, this was very interesting. I did not know that. Can you please provide a source for this knowledge?

This is discussed in Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, chapters 6 and 7. Unfortunately, I don't have a direct link to these chapters translated to English, but you can try to search them on Internet. Better still, you can go to an Orthodox synagogue and ask a rabbi to confirm it and to show you the exact source in Talmud.

Thank you!

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

If only it were that easy. I don't think that the problem will go away simply if we are more brutal and cruel to the enemy. If this is so why are they still bothering us? According to your understanding of the Crusades they should have disappeared centuries ago.

I think there is something more to it than just how vicious we are.

The problem is that aside from a few long-gone phases in the Joshua era, Jews have never come close to treating their enemies as they deserve. Time and time again we see, both in Scripture and observable human history, the Israelite nation sparing various Amalek entities for one stupid reason or another. The problem has never been worse than today, when around half of secular, brainwashed Israelis--and the vast majority of left-wing, assimilated, Hellenized Jews around the world--believe in "human rights" for their Nazi enemies. Chaim Ben Pesach illustrates this when he says that most Jews today "don't have the stomach" to treat Amalek as the Bible commands.

The Shoah took place in large part for this very reason. Read Anne Frank. The vast majority of Jews could not fathom violent armed resistance to the German Nazis even during the peak of the death camps. In the few times when a few Jews actually did decide to fight fire with fire during the Shoah (i.e. the Warsaw Ghetto), the result was nothing short of astonishing considering how severely outnumbered and outgunned the Jewish freedom fighters were. Some of the nations in the Nazi empire, such as Poland and Hungary, had enormous Jewish populations (10 or 15%), and with the higher Jewish birthrate, a huge amount of those Jews would have been of prime young military age. If Jews as a whole had gotten together and decided that they would go underground, take up arms, and resist the Nazis with everything they had, it would have been nearly impossble for the Germans to even stand still in those countries, let alone march on to Russia and throw the Jews into gas chambers.

[Yochai]

If only it were that easy. I don't think that the problem will go away simply if we are more brutal and cruel to the enemy. If this is so why are they still bothering us? According to your understanding of the Crusades they should have disappeared centuries ago.

I think there is something more to it than just how vicious we are.

The problem is that aside from a few long-gone phases in the Joshua era, Jews have never come close to treating their enemies as they deserve. Time and time again we see, both in Scripture and observable human history, the Israelite nation sparing various Amalek entities for one stupid reason or another. The problem has never been worse than today, when around half of secular, brainwashed Israelis--and the vast majority of left-wing, assimilated, Hellenized Jews around the world--believe in "human rights" for their Nazi enemies. Chaim Ben Pesach illustrates this when he says that most Jews today "don't have the stomach" to treat Amalek as the Bible commands.

The Shoah took place in large part for this very reason. Read Anne Frank. The vast majority of Jews could not fathom violent armed resistance to the German Nazis even during the peak of the death camps. In the few times when a few Jews actually did decide to fight fire with fire during the Shoah (i.e. the Warsaw Ghetto), the result was nothing short of astonishing considering how severely outnumbered and outgunned the Jewish freedom fighters were. Some of the nations in the Nazi empire, such as Poland and Hungary, had enormous Jewish populations (10 or 15%), and with the higher Jewish birthrate, a huge amount of those Jews would have been of prime young military age. If Jews as a whole had gotten together and decided that they would go underground, take up arms, and resist the Nazis with everything they had, it would have been nearly impossble for the Germans to even stand still in those countries, let alone march on to Russia and throw the Jews into gas chambers.

The problem with the idea of Amalek is that it is not up to the individual Jew to decide who is an Amalekite. 

Amalek is not metaphorical. It is a real entity, and as such, one cannot go around claiming anyone they don't like is a descendant of Amalek.  Remember, if someone is Amalek, then we have an obligation to blot out their name and kill their men, women, children, and animals.  So, if you decide someone is Amalek, you better be willing to fulfill the obligation.

If you believe someone is Amalek, and you do not do so, you are not following a Mitzva.  For this reason, this is a very sticky issue, and one should be careful in throwing around the word.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

The problem is that all countries, including Israel, have powerful laws in place protecting Amalek. In the Jewish nation, the life of an Amalekite is actually more valuable than that of a Jew. Murderers of Jews are generally paroled after a few years or freed as part of either a "confidence-building measure for peace" or in a so-called "prisoner swap", whereas Jews who obey the Bible by killing Amalek (like Amir Popper) will never be released as long as they live. Very few Jews are willing to go to prison for the rest of their lives for this.

I'm sure that had he lived, Baruch Goldstein (zt"l) would have gotten the death penalty.

[Yochai]

The problem is that all countries, including Israel, have powerful laws in place protecting Amalek. In the Jewish nation, the life of an Amalekite is actually more valuable than that of a Jew. Murderers of Jews are generally paroled after a few years or freed as part of either a "confidence-building measure for peace" or in a so-called "prisoner swap", whereas Jews who obey the Bible by killing Amalek (like Amir Popper) will never be released as long as they live. Very few Jews are willing to go to prison for the rest of their lives for this.

I'm sure that had he lived, Baruch Goldstein (zt"l) would have gotten the death penalty.

My issue is not about the Palestinians, but about Amalekites, and I do nto believe that Palestinians should be considered Amalekites.

Surely the Rav did not believe they were Amalekites, or he would have called for their death.  The fact that he told the PAlestinians they would be free to leave shows that he did not believe they were Amalek, or else he would have had to fulfill the mitzvah of blotting out their name.

Palestinians should be expelled. If they resist, violence should be used, even if it means extreme violence.  But, I do not believe they are Amalek, which is why they should only be killed if they resist an expulsion.

And Yes, Baruch Goldstein would definitely have gotten the death penalty because in Israel, murder is legal as long as its a settler whose killed, and G-d forbid a Philistine gets killed, then you have Israelis talking about the "rule of law", which is code for "We'll do whatever we please".

[Osher]

The reason I object for cruel methods of executions, is because I don't want members of our society to carry out or witness such actions. The harmful effect of such act would last long after the offender's demise. This doesn't constitute being kind to the cruel, but being kind to the kind.

It is stated in Jewish scripture that after we carry out the obligation to destroy our enemies God will instil in us mercy, so that the harmful effect wouldn't last on us. For those who understand Hebrew:

ד"ה ונתן לך רחמים: דמעשה עיר הנידחת גורם שלוש רעות בישראל: האחת שההורג נפש נעשה אכזר בטבעו... ואם נהרוג עיר שלמה, בעל כורחנו עלינו להוביל אנשים רבים להרוג ולהיות אכזרים... ועל זה הבטיח הכתוב שאם תעסוק בזה בלי שום הנאה מביזה ישוב ה' מחרון אפו "ונתן לך רחמים" – מידת הרחמים!

http://www.nechama.org.il/pages/1171.html

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

First of all, Yochai, there is no such thing as a "Palestinian". We all know that.

Now, on the issue of the Rav, you have to once again remember what the laws and political realities are like. He was banned and blacklisted in Israel--with the support (at the time) of most of the nation--for merely saying that the Arabs should leave. Can you imagine what he would have faced had he said what was really on his mind (that they should all be killed)? He wouldn't have seen the light of day from his 4'x4' hole in the ground ever again. It would have been utterly unthinkable to say such a thing.

You should really ask Chaim about this, as he is probably the closest surviving friend of HaRav.

[Manch]

If only it were that easy. I don't think that the problem will go away simply if we are more brutal and cruel to the enemy. If this is so why are they still bothering us? According to your understanding of the Crusades they should have disappeared centuries ago.

I think there is something more to it than just how vicious we are.

The problem is that aside from a few long-gone phases in the Joshua era, Jews have never come close to treating their enemies as they deserve. Time and time again we see, both in Scripture and observable human history, the Israelite nation sparing various Amalek entities for one stupid reason or another. The problem has never been worse than today, when around half of secular, brainwashed Israelis--and the vast majority of left-wing, assimilated, Hellenized Jews around the world--believe in "human rights" for their Nazi enemies. Chaim Ben Pesach illustrates this when he says that most Jews today "don't have the stomach" to treat Amalek as the Bible commands.

The Shoah took place in large part for this very reason. Read Anne Frank. The vast majority of Jews could not fathom violent armed resistance to the German Nazis even during the peak of the death camps. In the few times when a few Jews actually did decide to fight fire with fire during the Shoah (i.e. the Warsaw Ghetto), the result was nothing short of astonishing considering how severely outnumbered and outgunned the Jewish freedom fighters were. Some of the nations in the Nazi empire, such as Poland and Hungary, had enormous Jewish populations (10 or 15%), and with the higher Jewish birthrate, a huge amount of those Jews would have been of prime young military age. If Jews as a whole had gotten together and decided that they would go underground, take up arms, and resist the Nazis with everything they had, it would have been nearly impossble for the Germans to even stand still in those countries, let alone march on to Russia and throw the Jews into gas chambers.

Your comments about Shoa are very naive. You mix half truths. You should read about how Holocaust actually happened - the Germans never openly murdered Jews without actually giving them a hope, a sense of normalcy, of order. There was a whole method of ostracizing Jews among native population, of reducing them to animal-like behavior, to creating false hopes, to create new behavior of a defeated person without any rights.  The nazi murder machine was very devious and complex. And Germans didn't gas 6mln Jews - a great deal of Jews were starved, shot, fell to illness, froze, etc. And a great number of Jews died in the battle. Only in Red Army, more than 250,000 Jews were killed (out of more than 600,000 enlisted), not murdered. There were many Jewish partisans in France and Poland.

This sheep or slave-like behaviour is not typical of Jews only. Look at Soviet POW - more than 50%, or 3 mln of them, were murdered in nazi concentration camps - and  these were soldiers, able bodied men! Yet, nazi murder machine, through executions, hunger, torture, etc, has reduced them to a level were cannibalism thrived, were they felt and behaved like slaves. What did you expect Jewish women, children, grandparents to do - to revolt?! You know, that for one Jew escaping a ghetto to Partisans, Germans SS Police would murder hundreds of Jews in the ghetto? Is it easy to make such a decision? Can one leave a grand parents and children behind, knowing that they'll be murdered, along with hundred of other Jews? And were are you going to run? To population that hate your guts and that would report you back to nazis? I am not saying that some elements of "sheep" mentality didn't play their part - they unquestionably did, but please don't oversimplify the matter. What is maddening and is even more telling now is that Israeli, being the local superpower, still have all the elements of this galut ghetto mentality. And swine like Savage who accuses Jews of being hapless victims of nazis - like sheep to the slaughter, now states that a two state solution is inevitable (read Auschwitz borders) and we should just get alone.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Chaim,

I do not mean to oppose you on this but again, it is not written that we should enjoy punishing the guilty. The enjoyment part is the issue... Certainly this does not oppose the command to not show mercy to the merciless. The issue is whether it is to be done with enjoyment. When people enjoy cruelty it breeds more cruelty.

As I said before there is no question that those who are wicked must be removed from our midst. But there is also a principle that we should not glorify or rejoice in our enemies downfall. ....

Avos 4:19. Samuel the Small would say: "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice; when he stumbles, let your heart not be gladdened. Lest G-d see, and it will displeasing in His eyes, and He will turn His wrath from him [to you]" (Proverbs 24:17-18).

We are not supposed to enjoy the destruction of our enemies?

When G-d violently drowned the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea, what did Miriam and the all of the daughters of Israel do? Miriam, the sister of Moses and a great prophetess, led the daughters of Israel in a joyous song of celebration.

Speaking of which, here is a shiur by Rav Daweed Bar Hayim that might enlighten our Jewish readers to the issues involved.

It is entitled:  "Don't Rejoice at Purim and Pesach?!"
http://machonshilo.org/en/eng/list-audio-shiurim/35-hagim/268-dont-rejoice-at-purim-and-pesach


Chaim, you were right on the money with this response.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The problem is that all countries, including Israel, have powerful laws in place protecting Amalek. In the Jewish nation, the life of an Amalekite is actually more valuable than that of a Jew. Murderers of Jews are generally paroled after a few years or freed as part of either a "confidence-building measure for peace" or in a so-called "prisoner swap", whereas Jews who obey the Bible by killing Amalek (like Amir Popper) will never be released as long as they live. Very few Jews are willing to go to prison for the rest of their lives for this.

I'm sure that had he lived, Baruch Goldstein (zt"l) would have gotten the death penalty.

My issue is not about the Palestinians, but about Amalekites, and I do nto believe that Palestinians should be considered Amalekites.

It's debatable.   The Nazis were ascribed Amalek based on their ideology and behavior, and the Fakestinians exude the same antisemitism and even utilize the old nazi techniques in their media to incite the angry mobs.   They also desire similar things.    I believe that the Vilna Gaon states that any nation who makes war against Israel is to be considered Amalek.

However, I am also open to the possibility that they could be considered Caananites.   Because they are a nation residing in our land who wishes to do war against us as a means to keep/take the land away from us.   And some of this people was here when we came back to conquer/settle/inhabit our land.... Similarly there were people here when we came under Joshua.   I am open to either possibility, but in any case it is clear that we are in a state of war with Arab Fakestinians.   

So what difference does it really make?   When you are in a state of war with a people, you don't give them cupcakes.

[Manch]

The problem is that all countries, including Israel, have powerful laws in place protecting Amalek. In the Jewish nation, the life of an Amalekite is actually more valuable than that of a Jew. Murderers of Jews are generally paroled after a few years or freed as part of either a "confidence-building measure for peace" or in a so-called "prisoner swap", whereas Jews who obey the Bible by killing Amalek (like Amir Popper) will never be released as long as they live. Very few Jews are willing to go to prison for the rest of their lives for this.

I'm sure that had he lived, Baruch Goldstein (zt"l) would have gotten the death penalty.

My issue is not about the Palestinians, but about Amalekites, and I do nto believe that Palestinians should be considered Amalekites.

Surely the Rav did not believe they were Amalekites, or he would have called for their death.  The fact that he told the PAlestinians they would be free to leave shows that he did not believe they were Amalek, or else he would have had to fulfill the mitzvah of blotting out their name.

Palestinians should be expelled. If they resist, violence should be used, even if it means extreme violence.  But, I do not believe they are Amalek, which is why they should only be killed if they resist an expulsion.

And Yes, Baruch Goldstein would definitely have gotten the death penalty because in Israel, murder is legal as long as its a settler whose killed, and G-d forbid a Philistine gets killed, then you have Israelis talking about the "rule of law", which is code for "We'll do whatever we please".

This is a very interesting observation. Why don't you ask Chaim about it on his show?

[Spectator]

Thank you Manch and Yochai for the appreciation!

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

It's debatable.   The Nazis were ascribed Amalek based on their ideology and behavior, and the Fakestinians exude the same antisemitism and even utilize the old nazi techniques in their media to incite the angry mobs.   They also desire similar things.    I believe that the Vilna Gaon states that any nation who makes war against Israel is to be considered Amalek.

However, I am also open to the possibility that they could be considered Caananites.   Because they are a nation residing in our land who wishes to do war against us as a means to keep/take the land away from us.   And some of this people was here when we came back to conquer/settle/inhabit our land.... Similarly there were people here when we came under Joshua.   I am open to either possibility, but in any case it is clear that we are in a state of war with Arab Fakestinians.   

So what difference does it really make?   When you are in a state of war with a people, you don't give them cupcakes.

KWR, the sermon at my church this Sunday was why did G-d order Joshua to annihilate Amalek (i.e. the Amorites), including Amalekite women/children, in Deuteronomy 2-3, and what made Amalek worse than garden-variety Middle East idolaters such as the Moabites. It was very interesting to see such a topic of relevance to Israel today addressed, and the pastor did a decent job of it, albeit of course I think a Kahanist would have done better.

The pastor concluded that basically, Amalekite nations were so completely evil in every way (i.e. child sacrifice by immolation, starting jihads against the migrating Israelites for no reason, seducing the Israelites to idolatry) that there was no hope for every single one of them. He said that perhaps the reason that G-d ordered the children of Amalekites dead was that if permitted to live, they would have become a resentful minority in Israel that would have taken up arms against the Israelites later on and been a cancerous fifth column.

(For the record, I would have just said that the L-rd commanded Joshua to treat them like all Nazis who are dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish people should be treated, and that if anyone doubts that children are capable of being evil monsters deserving of death, to just remember the Fakestinian toddlers who dance around on their lawns and streets tossing out candy whenever a Jewish child is murdered/maimed by a Hamas rocket or a shahid. I would say that the Arabs are even more evil than the Biblical Amalekites or German Nazis because the former two never actually resorted to killing themselves in order to kill Jews.)

[muman613]

The reasons to wipe out Amalek are clearly explained in Torah... Because of Amaleks desire to remove Hashem from the world by insisting on everything happens because of the forces of nature. They tried to cool off Bnai Israel after having heard about the parting of the sea. Amalekites believed that there was an earthquake or tsunami which caused the sea to part, and not that Hashem was leading his people into redemption. Amalek always attempts to prove that Hashem has no power in this world. The Amalekites are enemies of the ONE G-d of Israel and they do everything in their power to destroy our faith in Hashem. When we were leaving Egypt the Amalekites attacked the rear flanks, the elder and young because they were the weakest. They targeted the youth and the elders because they knew this would spiritually hurt the young nation of Israel as it entered the wilderness.

Much has been written on the reason for Amalek...

http://www.torah.org/learning/yomtov/purim/vol5no17.html

The Medrash (Bereshis 63:8) writes "AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME ESAV (Bereshis 25:25). It is for nothing, for falsehood, ("shav") that I created him in My universe." Rav Gedalia Schorr explains that in the creation of the world, G-d fashioned a creation that has no rational connection to reality. The foundation of this creation is the belief in the happenstance. This creation, which negates G-d's existence and focuses on the battle versus that which "nature" has wrought, is Esav, primarily his descendant Amalek. Amalek epitomizes the belief in nature. The Amalekite attack on the nation of Israel right after their departure from Egypt is described (25:18) as " How he (Amalek) happened' upon you by the way. . . " Amalek is a nation that does not recognize G-d and His power.

Amalek's power over the nation of Israel exists only when the nation of Israel itself fails to recognize G-d. The Talmud (Rosh HaShana 29a) writes: "[It is written] and it came to pass, when Moshe held up his hand that Israel prevailed (in the battle against Amalek).' Now, did the hands of Moshe wage war or crush the enemy? Not so; rather, the text signifies that so long as Israel turned their thoughts above and subjected their hearts to their Father in heaven they prevailed, but otherwise they fell." During the battle against Amalek, when the nation of Israel saw the hands of Moshe outstretched towards the heavens, they realized that it was G-d who was going to dictate the victor of this battle. Amalek attacked the weak stragglers, hitting the nation at its most vulnerable point. Nature should have ordained that the nation of Israel was doomed. However, when the nation remembered G-d and prayed to Him, when they recognized His providence, G-d gave them the strength to overcome. And overcome they did.

Amalek demonstrated their disbelief in divine providence when they attacked the nation of Israel. The entire world had heard of the miraculous exodus of the nation of Israel from Egypt. Word of the plagues and the splitting of the sea had spread. The nations of the world feared the nation of Israel, who clearly had divine protection. Amalek dared to attack, nonetheless. They disregarded all the miracles. They dismissed any notion of divine protection. And they attacked. This was an unequivocal statement by the nation of Amalek that G-d has no role in the workings of the world. This was a pronouncement of Amalek's firm belief in the sole dependency upon one's own actions for success. This underlying belief of the nation of Amalek flies in the face of reality. It is a falsehood. Falsehood can not be tolerated.

Amalek, the descendant of Esav, is the nation of falsehood. The nation of Israel is commanded to eradicate the nation of Amalek because this falsehood can not exist. Random happenstance does not exist in the world. It is merely the product of the imagination, a superficial method of explaining away events. Amalek's entire existence is based on the non-existent. Therefore, we are to treat Amalek as they believe: we treat them as if they are a freak of nature, an anomaly never intended to exist, and therefore, under the laws of nature, subject to destruction, relegated to the realm of nothingness. Not even the memory of the nation of Amalek should exist.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Your comments about Shoa are very naive. You mix half truths. You should read about how Holocaust actually happened - the Germans never openly murdered Jews without actually giving them a hope, a sense of normalcy, of order. There was a whole method of ostracizing Jews among native population, of reducing them to animal-like behavior, to creating false hopes, to create new behavior of a defeated person without any rights.  The nazi murder machine was very devious and complex. And Germans didn't gas 6mln Jews - a great deal of Jews were starved, shot, fell to illness, froze, etc. And a great number of Jews died in the battle. Only in Red Army, more than 250,000 Jews were killed (out of more than 600,000 enlisted), not murdered. There were many Jewish partisans in France and Poland.

This sheep or slave-like behaviour is not typical of Jews only. Look at Soviet POW - more than 50%, or 3 mln of them, were murdered in nazi concentration camps - and  these were soldiers, able bodied men! Yet, nazi murder machine, through executions, hunger, torture, etc, has reduced them to a level were cannibalism thrived, were they felt and behaved like slaves. What did you expect Jewish women, children, grandparents to do - to revolt?! You know, that for one Jew escaping a ghetto to Partisans, Germans SS Police would murder hundreds of Jews in the ghetto? Is it easy to make such a decision? Can one leave a grand parents and children behind, knowing that they'll be murdered, along with hundred of other Jews? And were are you going to run? To population that hate your guts and that would report you back to nazis? I am not saying that some elements of "sheep" mentality didn't play their part - they unquestionably did, but please don't oversimplify the matter. What is maddening and is even more telling now is that Israeli, being the local superpower, still have all the elements of this galut ghetto mentality. And swine like Savage who accuses Jews of being hapless victims of nazis - like sheep to the slaughter, now states that a two state solution is inevitable (read Auschwitz borders) and we should just get alone.

How am I stating "half truths"? You are the one who has mixed-up analogies here. The Soviet soldiers who were captured were obviously disarmed and completely helpless. They couldn't start an insurrection from within the gulag. When they did have arms, they did fight the Germans. They didn't fight as well as the Jewish resistance partisans did, but at least they tried. The vast majority of European Jews--religious and secular--considered the resistance movements to be "radical", "extreme", "unpractical", etc. Even Anne Frank's own parents considered membership in even an unarmed Zionist organization to be inappropriate.

You are right that the Nazi murder machine did not start overnight. This gave the Jews every chance to react and prepare accordingly. Hitler did not start up the ovens immediately upon being elected. There was a very slow and gradual progression of increasing persecution and elimination of rights. Jews could still even legally acquire weapons for the first few years after 1933. In the countries that did not have a formal anti-Semitic regime (i.e. France, Poland, Hungary, etc.), this was even less of a factor. The Polish government, in concert with Ze'ev Jabotinsky, actually was arming and training Jewish insurrectionaries for a while because it hoped that all the Jews of Europe would join them and would all leave Europe and go to (then) British Palestine. We all know what happened with that. If the Jewish response to the Polish/Jabotinsky call to arms had been heeded even a tenth as much as the Bosnian Muslims heeded the Mufti's call to the SS, the Shoah would have probably been a lot smaller than it historically was.

[Zelhar]

The reason I object for cruel methods of executions, is because I don't want members of our society to carry out or witness such actions. The harmful effect of such act would last long after the offender's demise. This doesn't constitute being kind to the cruel, but being kind to the kind.

It is stated in Jewish scripture that after we carry out the obligation to destroy our enemies G-d will instil in us mercy, so that the harmful effect wouldn't last on us. For those who understand Hebrew:

ד"ה ונתן לך רחמים: דמעשה עיר הנידחת גורם שלוש רעות בישראל: האחת שההורג נפש נעשה אכזר בטבעו... ואם נהרוג עיר שלמה, בעל כורחנו עלינו להוביל אנשים רבים להרוג ולהיות אכזרים... ועל זה הבטיח הכתוב שאם תעסוק בזה בלי שום הנאה מביזה ישוב ה' מחרון אפו "ונתן לך רחמים" – מידת הרחמים!

http://www.nechama.org.il/pages/1171.html

Even so, I don't thin k this applies in the case we ourselves devise cruel methods that aren't sanctioned by the Torah. BTW you know what Chazal said about עיר הנידחת -
"לא הייתה ולא תהיה כזו בישראל "

[Manch]

Your comments about Shoa are very naive. You mix half truths. You should read about how Holocaust actually happened - the Germans never openly murdered Jews without actually giving them a hope, a sense of normalcy, of order. There was a whole method of ostracizing Jews among native population, of reducing them to animal-like behavior, to creating false hopes, to create new behavior of a defeated person without any rights.  The nazi murder machine was very devious and complex. And Germans didn't gas 6mln Jews - a great deal of Jews were starved, shot, fell to illness, froze, etc. And a great number of Jews died in the battle. Only in Red Army, more than 250,000 Jews were killed (out of more than 600,000 enlisted), not murdered. There were many Jewish partisans in France and Poland.

This sheep or slave-like behaviour is not typical of Jews only. Look at Soviet POW - more than 50%, or 3 mln of them, were murdered in nazi concentration camps - and  these were soldiers, able bodied men! Yet, nazi murder machine, through executions, hunger, torture, etc, has reduced them to a level were cannibalism thrived, were they felt and behaved like slaves. What did you expect Jewish women, children, grandparents to do - to revolt?! You know, that for one Jew escaping a ghetto to Partisans, Germans SS Police would murder hundreds of Jews in the ghetto? Is it easy to make such a decision? Can one leave a grand parents and children behind, knowing that they'll be murdered, along with hundred of other Jews? And were are you going to run? To population that hate your guts and that would report you back to nazis? I am not saying that some elements of "sheep" mentality didn't play their part - they unquestionably did, but please don't oversimplify the matter. What is maddening and is even more telling now is that Israeli, being the local superpower, still have all the elements of this galut ghetto mentality. And swine like Savage who accuses Jews of being hapless victims of nazis - like sheep to the slaughter, now states that a two state solution is inevitable (read Auschwitz borders) and we should just get alone.

How am I stating "half truths"? You are the one who has mixed-up analogies here. The Soviet soldiers who were captured were obviously disarmed and completely helpless. They couldn't start an insurrection from within the gulag. When they did have arms, they did fight the Germans. They didn't fight as well as the Jewish resistance partisans did, but at least they tried. The vast majority of European Jews--religious and secular--considered the resistance movements to be "radical", "extreme", "unpractical", etc. Even Anne Frank's own parents considered membership in even an unarmed Zionist organization to be inappropriate.

You are right that the Nazi murder machine did not start overnight. This gave the Jews every chance to react and prepare accordingly. Hitler did not start up the ovens immediately upon being elected. There was a very slow and gradual progression of increasing persecution and elimination of rights. Jews could still even legally acquire weapons for the first few years after 1933. In the countries that did not have a formal anti-Semitic regime (i.e. France, Poland, Hungary, etc.), this was even less of a factor. The Polish government, in concert with Ze'ev Jabotinsky, actually was arming and training Jewish insurrectionaries for a while because it hoped that all the Jews of Europe would join them and would all leave Europe and go to (then) British Palestine. We all know what happened with that. If the Jewish response to the Polish/Jabotinsky call to arms had been heeded even a tenth as much as the Bosnian Muslims heeded the Mufti's call to the SS, the Shoah would have probably been a lot smaller than it historically was.

The fact that you've mentioned that soviet POW were in nazi "gulags", that Jewish partisans fought better than their Russian or Belorussian or Ukrainian counterparts tells me more that you don't know much about WWII. Jews fought well enough in the Red Army an as partisans and do not need an embelishment at the expense of their non-Jewish comrades and friends. You statement that Jews could have gotten firearms in Europe since 1933 just confirms your naivite and ignorance of the subject. Where would Jews get firearms? In USSR, Poland, Holland, Germany, Greece, France? Which country openly allowed sell of non-hunting firearms to their citizens?! May be there was a separate exception clause for Jews? Yes, there is also a small question about ammunition. Notice that all resistance Jews (as non-Jews) had to rely on trophies.
A great source of information of how Holocaust really happened is to read not only Anne's Franks memoirs, may G-d avenge her soul, but to read Jewish veterans' memoirs as well. Here is a good source if you understand Russian or want to use Google Translate: http://www.iremember.ru/content/view/721/87/lang,en/

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

The fact that you've mentioned that soviet POW were in nazi "gulags", that Jewish partisans fought better than their Russian or Belorussian or Ukrainian counterparts tells me more that you don't know much about WWII. Jews fought well enough in the Red Army an as partisans and do not need an embelishment at the expense of their non-Jewish comrades and friends. You statement that Jews could have gotten firearms in Europe since 1933 just confirms your naivite and ignorance of the subject. Where would Jews get firearms? In USSR, Poland, Holland, Germany, Greece, France? Which country openly allowed sell of non-hunting firearms to their citizens?! May be there was a separate exception clause for Jews? Yes, there is also a small question about ammunition. Notice that all resistance Jews (as non-Jews) had to rely on trophies.
A great source of information of how Holocaust really happened is to read not only Anne's Franks memoirs, may G-d avenge her soul, but to read Jewish veterans' memoirs as well. Here is a good source if you understand Russian or want to use Google Translate: http://www.iremember.ru/content/view/721/87/lang,en/

Excuse me!?! Did you know that around four times as many Soviet soldiers as German soldiers were killed on the eastern front over the course of the war? There was an enormous discrepancy between the combat level of the average Nazi and the average Russian soldier (I am not talking special units, partisans, etc. here). Up until about Stalingrad, the Nazis were killing Red soldiers pretty much like ants. Granted, there were some good reasons for this (i.e. the fact that Stalin's officer purges left most of the Red army with little or no training or leadership), but still--the Nazis had a cakewalk for at least the first year of Barbarossa. It wasn't even close. Only the winter of 1941 and Lend-Lease stopped the Nazi savages from overrunning everything west of Japan. It wasn't until 1944 that the surviving battle-hardened Russian soldiers (benefiting enormously from Lend-Lease and Allied airpower that left the Ostfront troops of the Third Reich with basically no air support from mid-'43 on) really began to achieve any kind of skill equality with the Wehrmacht.

Go look up the ratio of Germans to Warsaw Ghetto freedom fighters killed in that battle, with their archaic and homemade weaponry, and compare it to that of Germans to Russians killed in Poland in January 1945 (a time when the Wehrmacht was starting to really suck). I can guarantee you that the heroic Jews were much more effective.

Most European nations--even the so-called dictatorships--were amazingly lax in their gun laws compared to today, and even compared to America today. The Jewish right to own firearms wasn't even completely taken away in Germany itself until 1938. There is a lot that Jews could have done to "wake up" considering that there was nearly a decade between the first mass-media wave of Nazi propaganda in Europe and the final loss of all Jewish freedom. The big problem was that then, as now, most Jews were supremely squeamish about firearms and were incapable of escaping their bubble of being "good little citizens" of the countries they dwelt in in order to "win over" the anti-Semites.

[Yochai]

First of all, Yochai, there is no such thing as a "Palestinian". We all know that.

Now, on the issue of the Rav, you have to once again remember what the laws and political realities are like. He was banned and blacklisted in Israel--with the support (at the time) of most of the nation--for merely saying that the Arabs should leave. Can you imagine what he would have faced had he said what was really on his mind (that they should all be killed)? He wouldn't have seen the light of day from his 4'x4' hole in the ground ever again. It would have been utterly unthinkable to say such a thing.

You should really ask Chaim about this, as he is probably the closest surviving friend of HaRav.

I absolutely agree with you that the Rav had to watch what he said, and for this reason, one should look for the deeper messages in his words.  On the other hand, I cannot extend this logic to Or Haraayon, as this was the Rav's Torah magnum opus, and as such, one must accept that he would only write what was true and what he believed, as Torah cannot be compromised.
Based on this, I am under the impression that the Arabs in EY are to be treated as the Seven nations, and not as Amalekites.
It may seem like semantics, but the classification is important in how we are to deal with them.  For this reason, I believe that they are to be given a chance to leave, and that we do not have an obligation to blot their names out.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I cannot extend this logic to Or Haraayon, as this was the Rav's Torah magnum opus, and as such, one must accept that he would only write what was true and what he believed, as Torah cannot be compromised.

Many rabbis have been subjected to trialless "administrative detention" for political crimes, often for many years. Sometimes, their "crimes" were as minor as urging soldiers to disobey expulsion orders. HaRav zt"l never said that the Arabs aren't Amalek--he just said that they have to leave. He almost certainly did desire that they all die, but voicing that publicly would be very illegal and would have destroyed all credibility he had with an Israeli nation that at that time was not ready to even consider paid compensation for Arabs to leave. Many devout rabbis at the time denounced Meir Kahane--they aren't doing that now, but in the mid-80s, his views on the Arabs were simply too radical for even most religious Israelis.

Based on this, I am under the impression that the Arabs in EY are to be treated as the Seven nations, and not as Amalekites.
It may seem like semantics, but the classification is important in how we are to deal with them.  For this reason, I believe that they are to be given a chance to leave, and that we do not have an obligation to blot their names out.

You should talk to Chaim about this. Of course he thinks the Arabs all deserve death, but that just is not possible. 5 million Jews just cannot kill 450 million Arabs and Iranians. If Chaim were to propose a plan to kill all the Arabs, he would meet with a similar fate as HaRav did when he proposed just expelling them. The Israeli nation is just not ready for that, period. We are lucky that around half of Israelis now support paying Arabs to leave.

[Yochai]

I cannot extend this logic to Or Haraayon, as this was the Rav's Torah magnum opus, and as such, one must accept that he would only write what was true and what he believed, as Torah cannot be compromised.

Many rabbis have been subjected to trialless "administrative detention" for political crimes, often for many years. Sometimes, their "crimes" were as minor as urging soldiers to disobey expulsion orders. HaRav zt"l never said that the Arabs aren't Amalek--he just said that they have to leave. He almost certainly did desire that they all die, but voicing that publicly would be very illegal and would have destroyed all credibility he had with an Israeli nation that at that time was not ready to even consider paid compensation for Arabs to leave. Many devout rabbis at the time denounced Meir Kahane--they aren't doing that now, but in the mid-80s, his views on the Arabs were simply too radical for even most religious Israelis.

Based on this, I am under the impression that the Arabs in EY are to be treated as the Seven nations, and not as Amalekites.
It may seem like semantics, but the classification is important in how we are to deal with them.  For this reason, I believe that they are to be given a chance to leave, and that we do not have an obligation to blot their names out.

You should talk to Chaim about this. Of course he thinks the Arabs all deserve death, but that just is not possible. 5 million Jews just cannot kill 450 million Arabs and Iranians. If Chaim were to propose a plan to kill all the Arabs, he would meet with a similar fate as HaRav did when he proposed just expelling them. The Israeli nation is just not ready for that, period. We are lucky that around half of Israelis now support paying Arabs to leave.

The Rav went to jail many times, so I do not see why he would watch his word sometimes and not other times, as he clearly showed he had no fear of jail.  As for all arabs deserving death, the Rav often said he could not care less about Arabs who lived outside of EY, and Rav Binyamin also said that after his death. Here he is saying it at around 3:30-


Also, in Rebbetzin Kahane's book, she wrote of how the Rav would often share his meals with a Paki Muslim, because he was not able to find halal food. The Rav stated that as long as the Arabs are outside of EY, they can do what they want to each other- killing, raping, pillaging and all the other regular activities of the Arab lifestyle.

[Lisa]

A long time ago, my father and brother in law once went to hear Rabbi Kahane give a speech at a someone's house in Kings Point, Great Neck.  Anyway, my brother in law told me that when the Rabbi was asked about what to do with the Arabs in Israel, he said something about them all being killed. (My brother in law didn't give an exact quote.) This prompted my father and b-i-l to walk out of the speech. 

So it's quite possible that Rabbi Kahane later toned things down in his speeches and books.  But then again, Chaim would be the best person to ask about this. 

[muman613]

<snip>

You should talk to Chaim about this. Of course he thinks the Arabs all deserve death, but that just is not possible. 5 million Jews just cannot kill 450 million Arabs and Iranians. If Chaim were to propose a plan to kill all the Arabs, he would meet with a similar fate as HaRav did when he proposed just expelling them. The Israeli nation is just not ready for that, period. We are lucky that around half of Israelis now support paying Arabs to leave.

Actually according to Torah, if all Jews fully believed in Hashems awesome power, this small amount of Jews could wipe out all the Arabs in the world...

Here, quoted from Parasha Bechutokai, which also contains the curses against us, is the promise that we can:

Leviticus 26:3-27:34

6. And I will grant peace in the Land, and you will lie down with no one to frighten [you]; I will remove wild beasts from the Land, and no army will pass through your land;

7. You will pursue your enemies, and they will fall by the sword before you;

8. Five of you will pursue a hundred, and a hundred of you will pursue ten thousand, and your enemies will fall by the sword before you.

9. I will turn towards you, and I will make you fruitful and increase you, and I will set up My covenant with you.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Actually according to Torah, if all Jews fully believed in Hashems awesome power, this small amount of Jews could wipe out all the Arabs in the world...

Muman, I completely agree with you and I am aware of the fact that we (Jews and Christians) can accomplish anything through faith, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of world Jewry and the majority of Israeli Jewry are not currently walking in the power of Hashem. Most Jews still fear BHO more than G-d. Certainly the vast majority of both world and Israeli Jews would not even agree with killing all the present-day Amalekites (if it were even discussed).

There's a difference between not having faith and being forced to be pragmatic in the light of current political realities. The Bolshevik rulers of Israel and most Jews worldwide are guilty of the former. HaRav Meir David Kahane (zt"l), Chaim Ben Pesach, and other Kahanists have to accept the latter for the time being in order to be taken seriously and not go to prison for "thoughtcrimes".